Deprecated: mysql_connect(): The mysql extension is deprecated and will be removed in the future: use mysqli or PDO instead in /home/ncpedp/public_html/dnis.org/Connections/connect.php on line 15
Resource id #3
Universal Design is the basis of accessibility: Prof. Abir Mullick - Volume 3 Issue 12: Disability News and Information Service for India

Universal Design is the basis of accessibility: Prof. Abir Mullick

"We might find it much more reasonable, and possible to go toward universal design and skip this whole idea of accessibility, because Universal Design is the basis of
accessibility” says Prof. Abir Mullick, Centre for Inclusive Design &
Environmental Access, University at Buffalo, in conversation with Chitra S. Shankar

1. How would you define Universal Design? And why is the
concept of Universal Design so important?

Universal Design is a truly American concept and came from the whole idea of social equity. During World War
II, for the first time people in the U.S. started thinking about ways to
accommodate a large number of people who where suddenly disabled. It became more
prominent during Vietnam War. At first it was collective rehabilitation, but
that experiment led to thinking of disabled people as individuals and
recognising independence for them for two reasons – one, they could provide
revenue and be tax payers, and two, they could lead an independent life without
the support of family and other people.

Early on it was about legislation and equal rights and equal access. From that came off other issues
like discrimination at jobs and built environment. They realised that dealing
with discrimination in a binary fashion was becoming counter productive. For
example, in the U.S., they have accessible drinking fountains - one kind of
fountain for disabled and another for non disabled people right next to it. This
leads to duplication of resources. Again, through design they are being more
discriminatory. A majority of disabled people wanted to be part of the larger
workforce and there were others who also felt they could benefit from certain
kind of accommodation. That is when Universal Design came. Universal Design
talks about accommodation for everyone with an inclusive environment -
environments that do not really point to single user groups.

2. Would you say Universal Design is significant,
especially in the Indian context?

I think it is very significant. I will give one example. Before the cell phone we all depended on landlines,
which was never adequate and few people could actually access. So that was an
exclusive kind of system. And suddenly cell phones came and it became common. In
the west, they first went to landlines with good distribution and network, and
then to cell phone. In India we have jumped a complete technology and in doing
so we have sort of levelled the play field. In the west they went through the
stage of accessibility for people with disabilities and then to Universal
Design. But I think in India one can jump that. We might find it much more
reasonable, and possible to go toward Universal Design and skip this whole idea
about accessibility, because Universal Design is the basis of accessibility.

3. Tell us something about the latest developments in terms of new concepts vis-à-vis access in the U.S,
from which we could learn / use in India.

One interesting concept that is coming up in the U.S. is visitability. Visitability is seen as an
ordinance, which means neighbourhoods will act in this regard. While people with
disabilities living in their homes are accessible, they in turn cannot go to
somebody else’s house and are left behind in social interactions. So the
ordinance is to adopt the idea that all homes will have all accessible means -
no threshold, no steps, and at least one accessible bathroom downstairs. This is
a new movement that has really caught on, with even the Congress discussing it.

4. As a consultant to United Nations have you assisted in
development of accessibility policies? Could you share your experiences? And in
that sense I would like you to comment on the policies in India in this area.

I did some work for United Nations in the Middle East. We were looking at accessibility policies in the
region. That was when I realised this whole idea of interdependence. Universal
Design does not fit in the way it does in the west. In the Middle East, design
is not just that of a wheelchair, but looking at designing one so that the
person assisting can handle it better. We were looking at transportation where
people could help each other in getting in and out, settlements that have to
deal with sensibilities not just of people with disabilities but with people
living with them.

As for India, I think the bigger problem is not the lack of information, or lack of laws. But there are two
things - one is implementation and the other is accountability. I do not want to
use the word policing, but implementation and policing are really most
important. I would like to cite the example of Dilli Haat, which I quite like,
apart from the pavement. The plan is quite good because it is a very Indianised
idea of accessibility, and I think that is the area where we are lacking -
interpretation of accessibility in the Indian context.

5. What are the challenges that Universal Designers face
(if any)?

It is a constant challenge because we set ourselves up for a very big goal – to be inclusive. And
that is not easy. So we are always pushing boundaries, and asking how we can
make things more inclusive whether it is at the functional, social, economic,
cultural or aesthetic level. Even at the government level design can sometimes
become secondary to them because they think it is part of things that are
already happening. Back in the U.S. we are accountable to the Congress. So we
always keep showing them how our work is benefitting a larger group of users.
One can very quickly disappear from the radar. So the challenge is to be
visible.

6. India has design houses and design institutes yet
design facilities are of low standard for disabled people. Why do you think
India is lagging?

This is due to several reasons. One is that design institutions are catering to competing demands. Disability is
only one of them. Coupled with competing interests, there is lack of faculty
training to actually teach about these components.

The other thing that has happened in the west is legislation and accountability. Let us say somebody
meets with an accident. If the court finds out that it is not their fault, but
that of the environment, they can go after the environment. So the correction
factor happens through legislative means. We do not really have that system
here. I am beginning to see that the courts are becoming more active, but it is
not enough. The other thing is insurance issue, because a lot of our life style
is supported by insurance – health, accident, etc. We do not have that system.

7. In this context, do you think Universal Design education is important? What are the prerequisites for
Universal Design education in design curriculum in India?

It is very important. There is a need for this, because, if we believe that Universal Design is an important
issue, and if we think of policies and environments being more flexible, which
many more people can use, it can be much more cost-effective, and there is less
discrimination.

Second, what we have thought about Universal Design in the U.S. is more about civil rights and independence
for everyone. But in India it is more interdependence than independence because
one has to be inclusive of not just one user group, but also another user group
which is supporting that. I think that there is need for some local effort to
understand what it means and address it in a way that it suits the Indian
situation. What we have done over time is continuing education; we have taught
professionals - not only students, but also professionals out there, so that
they can go and make the changes.

8. Regarding accessible approach in rural India using rural resources, do you think design needs and
modern techniques can be adapted to local resources, skills and materials
available?

Yes. In this context I would like to say a bit about National Institute of Design (N.I.D.). It started off as
an institution where the founders (American designers) were invited by the
Indian government to give them some ideas about what design could do for small
industries. They recommended establishing an institution where Indian designers
could be trained to think about Indian things. That is how N.I.D. started. But
in the early years of N.I.D., mostly European and western designers taught
design. So they were just like the western design.

When I was there, I was struck by this idea about ‘appropriate’ technology. That is, how best local resources
can be used. I remember looking at harvesting implements such as sickle. I
designed some very early harvesting implements that one could stand and use.
What I am trying to say here is that it was for the first time that people at
N.I.D. went to villages. There is a need for institutes like N.I.D. to go out
and look at these local situations, and train the students to look at the same
and think of designs that make use of local resources and local technology.
There is a way to make technology cheaper and more accessible and more
affordable.

9. What difference do you think exists in the approach of India and other countries with regard to
Universal Design?

In the U.S. the approach has always been the user. And that has been the driving force for Universal Design.
But there the users may be a little more uniform. They have some basic
amenities, in other words the infrastructures are better. But here in India, the
infrastructure may be different; people may be of a wide range of income groups.
The differences between the users are so high that the challenge in India may be
that of finding ways to bridge the gap. And this may be even more of a
challenge, with people so different economically, socially or educationally.
Language is another big issue. In India there are so many different technologies
too which is another challenge. In the west everything is dependent on mass
manufacturing and there is very little happening on a smaller scale like in
India. It is much more uniform, whereas here, it is heterogeneous.